Soros blasts Hastert over drug allegation

George Soros, the billionaire financier who has given millions of dollars to liberal and Democratic-leaning advocacy groups, launched a blistering counterattack on Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) yesterday, saying he should be “ashamed” of allegations he made Sunday.

Hastert had suggested that Soros’s wealth came from criminals, and in a letter Soros challenged the Speaker to substantiate his claims or publicly apologize.

In a tartly worded demand faxed to Hastert, Soros wrote: “Your recent comments implying that I am receiving funds from drug cartels are not only untrue, but also deeply offensive. You do a discredit to yourself and to the dignity of your office by engaging in these dishonest smear tactics. You should be ashamed.



“I must respectfully insist that you either substantiate these claims — which you cannot do because they are false — or publicly apologize for attempting to defame my character and damage my reputation.”

The spat began in an interview on Fox News with anchor Chris Wallace, in which Hastert said, “You know, I don’t know where George Soros gets his money. I don’t know where — if it comes overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from. …”


http://www.hillnews.com/news/090104/soros.aspx


Here is what Josh Marshall says about Hastert....also a video of Hasert.

More on Soros and Hastert.

The Hill has a piece in Wednesday's paper in which the reporter asked Hastert's spokesman John Feehery whether he had any evidence of Soros' ties or funding by drug cartels. Feehery makes clear that he and his boss have no evidence for this whatsoever but insist that they stand behind the vaguely but ominously worded accusation.

(See this link for actual video of what Haster said. It's worth taking a moment to watch it because the bare words of text don't really do it justice.)

These are scary times. And it's an ominous sign of the times that the Speaker of the House can float such a false and extremely defamatory charge and have the behavior go almost unnoticed in the press.

Think about it.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_08_29.php#003396

better apologize, dumbass.

Char..LOL

In defamation lawsuits, such a demand letter for a retraction is always the first step. Failure to retract then leads to filing suit, generally within 30 days. Hastert's such a pompous ass he's not likely to retract, and he certainly can't "substantiate".

I'd love to see Soros sue Hastert's sorry ass. Soros can certainly afford the legal costs fees. Boy, I'd love to have Soros as my client in such a suit - looks like a slam dunk. I'd be happy to handle it on a pure contingency basis.

To the Dem running against the crackhead.

Lets walk down the hill and fuck em all..Phil Crane Goin down your next Hasert! Were coming after the 14th district next stooge.

http://www.melissabean.com/

:dem:

"Asked if Soros had earned money from drug cartels, Hastert added, “Well, that’s what he’s been for a number years — George Soros has been for legalizing drugs in this country. So, I mean, he’s got a lot of ancillary interests out there. … I’m saying I don’t know where groups — could be people who support this type of thing. I’m saying we don’t know.”


Let me get this straight. If you are making money on the black market because of the illegality of drugs, you'd want to legalize them so that you would make less money???

This is very, very good news.

Soros should fry Hastert for this.

I've been opposing drug liberalization all my life because governement monopoly would cut me & the boys dry. Goddam pinko socialists! Even "free" capitalist markets has too much red tape and them goddam lawsuits against nicotine peddlers is nothing but communism. So we need even more illegal markets to keep the wheels turning, there's the rush, there's real Freedom, the real American Way!

C'mon Kerry... BCCI ..expose this human refuse for the shit they are

bylaws that compels them to make crap up or is it that folks with a loose grasp on reality are more likely to become republicans?

because of his own twisted belief that we are entering the "end days" of the bible and it's all going away soon anyway, that everyone around him thinks it's ok to say almost anything and think they can get away with it.

If they actually stood on the data and results of their philosophy and consequent legislation, they would be admitting they were wrong. The results of their actions have always failed to produce the desired results.

So, they just make stuff up to further an agenda that's more important to them then the results of that agenda.
The Professor

Enron
WorldCom
Amway

etc., etc., etc., ...

They have their own drug dealers giving them pleny of cash (i.e. pharaceutical companies)

Now it's business as usual.

I hope Soros sues for slander.

public officials can make wild, unsubstantiated charges and never have to answer for them.

fight fire with fire. hastert used to be a wrestling coach. maybe he made a pass at some of his former players.

When a public official (Hastert, here) is defamed, he must prove "malice" in addition to the usual elements of defamation (in this case, libel, not slander). And "wild, unsubstantiated charges" is very close to a definition of "malice". So if the tables were turned, and it was Soros making such defamatory allegations against Hastert, Soros would most likely "have to answer for them".

When George Soros, a private person, is defamed, he does not need to prove "malice". And Hastert would absolutely "have to answer for" his defamatory remarks.

maybe you could cite some examples of when a private citizen has sued a public official for slander/libel/defamation and won.

I'll find much in the way of real cases, because this is the first time in my lifetime that public officals, all Repukes, have behaved this way. However, all I was trying to do with my post was clarify the legal issues.

The rules of law I cited about "public officials" apply in general to "public persons". I treated "public officials" as a subset of "public persons". There is a ton of case law which illustrates my point about "public persons".

and I'm pretty sure he's not, then there's no defense. Hastert is a public official, and you can say anything you want about him, but Soros is a private individual and has the same right to sue as we do.

hell soros would go through if he did choose to sue. it would be impossible for him to win.

i do believe, though, that he would be considered a public figure because he voluntarily puts himself in the public eye.

Soros has been involved in lots of lawsuits and would consider this one a minor annoyance at most and more likely a lot of fun. Soros won't even care if he wins. He has enough money in his couch cushions to depose every single person Hastert has ever spoken to in the last five years. Hastert and every one of his staff members will be subject to multiple discovery requests and depositions. Soros will make their lives a living hell and unless Hastert makes the government pay his legal bills, Soros may bankrupt him and every single one of his staff members.

juat so I could fire Denny Hastert.

the question is - "can Hastert afford to defend himself in a court of law?"

from Halliburton would pick up the legal tab for him.

He's from a rural district about 45 miles west of downtown Chicago. The towns of note in that district are Yorkville, Sandwich, Plano. The urban sprawl is moving in that direction, so some of the Aurora sprawl might be in his district. I forget.

I used to play golf with the guy that cut his lawn while he Hastert was in D.C. That guy and his wife were also school teachers in Yorkville.
The Professor

Not the economy, not security, this election is all about the MEDIA and how they were coopted by the Right-wing Political Dirty Tricks circle.

Shameful, indeed.

we'll hear all about those whiny democrats.

:shrug:

Nevermind.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x792828

I am not saying he fondles them but he has ancillary actions in his wrestling coaching so it is very possible. I am not saying for sure he is a pedophile but all indications are that is where his interests lie.

young cheerleaders. I'm not saying he's done anything intimate with them, but he has spent a considerable amount of time around them.

:evilgrin:

then he should be able to prove it, right?

Purple heart lady, she is scary :scared:

And, he hasn't denied any of these accusations!

(to use Michelle Malkin "logic")

...that he was a little too close to some pulchritudinous little morsels. I mean, who's to say he didn't have a taste or two?

Thanks, Michelle Malkin...this is sooooo easy!

Hey, first post here. I'm a law student so I have an ego, but I really think that Soros should at least initiate a lawsuit against Hsstert.

However, I think that Kerry definitely has grounds for a libel suit against John Oneil and the other Swift Boat Veterans who lied. This might deter future attempts by Rove and others.

This is not like Jerry Falwell suing Larry Flynt for libel, because that was satire. These ridiculious claims by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are definitely not satire. To describe someone as a baby killer is highly inflammatory and constitutes libel if the claim is based on falsehood.

In 1992 Ted Sampley, who founded Vietnam Vets Against Kerry and is a supporter of the Swiftees, created a fake photo of John Kerry shooting an American MIA. Why does Kerry allow these lies to continue?!?

If the Repugs want to play hardball, why don't we throw them a curve ball and use the legal system for remedies?

peace

Taking a page from the John O'Neill playbook, Hastert denies that he implied that Soros received money from drug groups.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=35526

Another bald-faced liar.

Slime and run. It's been the same since before McCarthy, and it must work for them.

Nah...they have nothing else.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/bl/archive.html?month=200408
or more specifically, via streaming audio:
http://www.wnyc.org/stream/ram.py?file=raotl/bl082304c.ra (this a slow download)

Toward the end, after hysterical misunderstanding of the tax system, Hastert goes this bizarre rant (about 30:20):

Brian Lehrer: We have two minutes left. What do you think of these Swift Boat Veterans' ads, and John Kerry's calls for the President to denounce them?

Speaker Hastert: Well, you'll find out that if you look into the record I was against the Campaign Finance Reform Act, because that's what I felt that that would happen -- that you would push into guys like George Soros, who's dumping in 16 or 20 million dollars. You really don't know where that money comes from. You don't know where it comes from from the left and you don't know where it comes from on the right. It could -- you know, Soros money -- some of that's coming from overseas. It could be drug money. We don't know where it comes from. And so on!

Hastert is truly bizarre!